1. In the first place, when the family is expecting a new baby,
the parents should begin early to talk and to convince their older children
as to how important the children's help is going to be with the caring
of their new baby brother or sister. The parents should also discuss the
children's considerable responsibilities as older brothers or sisters.
They should mention that these responsibilities will change with the baby's
age, and that they will continue for the rest of the siblings' lives.

2. The parents should plan to allow sufficient time between the
births of each of their children so as to try to avoid having more than
one child needing the same kind of care and attention at one time.
Also, as was previously mentioned, if the older child is still very young,
he or she will not yet have the capacity to understand the parents' explanations
with respect to the efforts needed for the care of the new baby.
A child that is still too young will not be able to understand and respond
to the new baby's arrival in a reasoned manner, but will tend to respond
in a purely emotional negative way. It should be noted that Jewish
law permitted an abortion if the mother already had a child that was less
than two years old.

3. Parents should carefully observe their children, and continually
explain to the older siblings the necessity that the parents have of their
help with the care of the younger ones.

4. Parents should NEVER demonstrate a special preference for one
of their children (of course, they certainly can and will HAVE such a liking
or preference - the damage only occurs if the child's other siblings become
aware of this preference). Giving preferential treatment to one of
their children is one of the most TOXIC attitudes that parents can have
with respect to their families. This attitude will actively cause
the development of rivalry among their children. EVERY child has
nagging suspicions that his parents love another one of his brothers or
sisters more than they love him. There cannot be any good reason
for parents to encourage their children's feelings of rivalry by confirming
such suspicions (See also Sibling Rivalry and the Family Favorite).

5. Another common mistake among parents is when they tend to over-identify
themselves with one (or more) of their children and to satisfy that child's
every wish or "to give that child everything that the parent didn't have
as a child." This parental attitude will make it difficult for the
child to grow out of his initial self-centered stage. It will also
obstruct the development of his or her tendencies toward cooperative behavior.
More than 200 years ago the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote:

"Do you know a sure way to make an unhappy child? It
is to accustom that child to getting everything that he or she wants.
Because, as the child grows, so will its demands. Sooner or later
the child's wishes will become larger than our capacity to satisfy them,
and this unexpected denial will cause him more torment than the lack of
that thing he demanded of us."

And, from that pain will come hate and loathing.
Both extremes, of too little or of too much satisfaction of their wishes,
are harmful to the emotional development of children.

This mistake is also frequently committed by parents of an only child, or with the oldest child, (during the time he or she is still an only child) and is also often committed by parents or caregivers who were abused or neglected when THEY were children - They are "not really" giving their child this extra love and attention, they are really giving THEMSELVES this extra love and attention (so it really is only a misguided form of parental self-love). These parents tend to feel that the only thing that their children need is LOVE. The problem is that children that receive this kind of "overabundant" love and attention, without sufficient moral and ethical life examples and instruction, tend not to grow out of the childish self-centered stage - they may grow up to be VERY intelligent and creative adults, but they will tend to use their talents ONLY for their OWN gratification - they may also become manipulative and abusive, simply because they have not developed the mental structures to empathize with the suffering and harm they may be causing on others (See Readers' Letters, and also Note 2, Abuse of Power).

6. Another very toxic attitude that parents have with towards
their children, is showing them APPROVAL for harmful or destructive behaviors,
such as a lack of respect towards the other parent, or towards any of the
child's siblings or any other person.

7. Because of the previously mentioned reasons, parents should
not leave their children alone at home, with the older ones caring for
the younger ones, if the oldest child is still less than twelve years old.

8. Parents need to plan and carry out frequent "family activities"
with all of their children. During these, parents should try to avoid
games and contests in which one of the children "wins" and the others "lose."
They should instead look for activities and pastimes in which they ALL
"win" if they cooperate with one another.

9. Each child's temperament is a matter of luck. Nature
selects it at random, without asking the parents' opinion. So then,
some children are born with an abrasive temperament, are strong-willed,
or may be easily angered or irritated. On the other hand, there are
other children that are naturally sweet-tempered, mild-mannered, docile
and obedient (The three components of a child's temperament are usually
considered to be emotional intensity, activity level, and sociability).
Parents or would-be parents have to be prepared for the fact that EACH
of their children will come with his or her OWN temperament, and they have
to be prepared to rear and educate each one of their children working with
THAT particular child's innate temperament. What is important for
the development of that child as a true human being is not the child's
temperament, but his or her character. Character is the result of
the child's innate temperament plus the rearing given by his or her parents.

10. Above all, parents need to spend TIME with EACH ONE of their
children. Without asking for their consent, we brought them into
this world - We need to take the time to have an active part in the shaping
of their minds, to share our life experiences with them, and to become
a friend to them (And, no - buying them material things instead of spending
time with them will not make you their friend. Also, being their friend
does NOT mean you stop being their parent or stop being the source of moral
authority within the family). If we do not take this time,
we definitely need
to ask ourselves this question: Just WHAT was our purpose in bringing
them into this world?

There are several ways
in which the community can help reduce the incidence of the many problems brought about by inadequate parenting, including sibling rivalry.
The community's help is specially necessary for those families that have
suffered different traumas due to social or natural disasters. The
community also has a definite interest in breaking the vicious cycle of
ignorance that keeps these problems recurring generation after generation.

One way in which communities
can help with this is including the previously discussed concepts in elementary
and high school study programs, within such courses as Education for Family
Life, or Social Studies. This should begin in early grades, with
simple and general concepts, advancing towards detailed discussions on
causes and consequences for high school students. Sex education is a necessary
but certainly not a sufficient preparation for future family life.

Because of these same
reasons, perhaps these concepts should be included in mandatory counseling
sessions or courses for couples applying for marriage licenses. And since not
all children are born to married couples, these concepts could also be
included in similar counseling sessions or courses for all women who are pregnant
or who have recently given birth, possibly as part of pre- or postnatal
social or medical assistance. If possible, these courses should be evaluated, with some kind of a (possibly monetary) small reward for successful completion. (For example, the Magna Systems company distributes a series of instructional videos that could be adapted for such courses. See also Additional reading - Books on Parenting and on Sibling Rivalry).

This also means that
national or regional social and economic development plans and programs
should be re-examined as to whether these include adequate support for the
well-being of the family. Such programs usually address economic growth,
employment, nutrition and/or health. However, if these plans make inadequate
or no provisions for long-term support for the well-being of the family (e.g., for
time for parents to spend with their children, and for guidance on how to help their
children develop into well-adjusted, productive members of the community) then they are,
in the long run, worthless.

Without adequate support for
the family, these programs are worthless because,
even if they attain their stated economic, health or nutrition goals, their end
result will be families with an appearance of abundance of material possessions,
and apparently healthy and well-nourished children. But, if these children have
not developed adequate affective bonds to their families and their communities,
they will lack an inner vision of a positive purpose in life and become social
malcontents that easily fall prey to drugs, gangs, or other self- or socially
destructive behaviors - surely not a desirable goal, either for the community
or for the individual. However,
this depressing situation appears to be occurring with increasing frequency
in communities all over the world.

Economists seem to believe that improvements in "productivity" will solve most social problems, as when productivity is improved, more value is produced in the same amount of time, less workers are needed for the same amount of service or product, and so the salaries of the workers can be raised. However, these economists seem to forget or overlook the fact that when productivity is improved, less workers are needed - as a consequence, some or many workers are let go (i.e., are fired, i.e, "downsized") and, yes, the workers that remain may have better salaries, but they are under the continuous (unspoken or not) threat that, if their "productivity" does not continue improving, they too will be let go - so essentially, these workers are at work all the time ("24/7") and therefore, they do not have the time for adequate parenting - their children will be morally underdeveloped, although these parents will usually try to overcompensate for their lack of parenting with an excess of material things, expensive clothes, toys, and other gadgets.

On the other hand, the workers that are let go usually are only able to find less-well-paying jobs - they may need to work at several jobs just to make ends meet, so again these parents will not have the time for adequate parenting... Or, with inadequate incomes, their children may lose their respect for them, and so their parenting becomes ineffective ("Why can't you buy me those expensive tennis shoes? - Why can't you buy me that expensive electronic gadget?") - It is actually a wonder that young people in our present-day society don't have even more serious drug and gang problems! (Another matter is that, if less and less people have adequate incomes in a society, just who is going to purchase all the goods and services that these companies with improved "productivity" are selling? If these companies have less and less sales, what is going to happen to the stock and to the stockholders of these companies...? - Hello? - Can anybody see what happened to the Ford Motor Co.? - Is your company next?)

This is why each community needs
to work on developing and encouraging work and employment systems that allow parents
to spend enough time with their children, and also by the development and implementation
of effective social work and childcare systems (See, e.g., Additional reading - Books on more family-friendly forms of social organization). One should remember that, in the degree
in which these problems are not solved, it is us and our descendants that will have to
live with their consequences.

THE TRANSCENDENTAL SOCIAL IMPORTANCE OF SIBLING RIVALRY

What has been said
so far gives an idea of the importance and consequences of sibling rivalry
within each family, and of its negative effects, which may last for several
generations. However, sibling rivalry may also have transcendental
social consequences, whose pernicious and persistent negative effects have
permeated human history and continue to manifest themselves in the present.
We begin by postulating that the principal source of all moral evil (i.e., any harm or injury
caused to human beings by human beings) is
the abuse of power or authority (in contrast to harm caused by natural accident or misfortune, without any person's willful action; see Note 2, Abuse of Power).

Throughout history,
we humans have innately recognized this, and continually lamented and deplored
the abuse of power. This being so, WHY does abuse of power continue
to manifest itself? Where do people learn to abuse power? Where do
they learn that "might makes right"? (Or, perhaps more importantly, where
did they NOT learn not to abuse their power?). The place where it is most
natural to suppose that we learned (or did not learn) these things is within
our early family environment, through the constant and repeated interaction
with our parents and our siblings - the family environment is the source
of our most enduring patterns of thought and action, and of our moral values (What things do we teach our children to value? What things to admire? What things to love? What things to hate or despise? - Or do we just let them learn these things from the TV or from minimum-wage daycare employees?).

So, what does this mean with respect to abuse of power?

What this means is that some human beings learn to abuse their power directly through unsupervised or unchecked
sibling rivalry situations in their early family environment - others will
learn to abuse it indirectly from these preceeding ones, in the form of the abuse they receive from their parents or other
persons in positions of authority, and so on.&nbsp We can see that this is how the pool of abusers in the community is continually replenished.

Because of the nature
of the human mental structure, to the young child, might IS right.
To very young children, whatever means are available to satisfy their wishes
are automatically justified. Young children have no sense of "abuse
of power" as evil. If within the family there is no parental moral
authority to the contrary, that is what the older siblings will learn,
and that is also what the younger siblings will learn. And, when
these children grow up and have families of their own, that is what, in
turn, THEIR children will learn from them. So then, this pernicious
effect of sibling rivalry is also transmitted from generation to generation.
And, if someone has no sense of moral wrongness in the abuse of power towards
members of his or her own family, it can be
expected that that is how they
will feel towards the rest of the people in their social environment.

What has previously been described can be considered as an "inadvertent" or "accidental" mechanism or sequence for the origin of the abusive personality. Then, there can also be the profoundly pathological case of parents, families or social groups, that actively and intentionally teach their children that abuse of power is a desirable moral value, i.e., an acceptable form of resolving conflicts or of imposing one's will on others. If one accepts that abuse of power is the prime source of moral evil, then active teaching of this kind should certainly be considered a crime against humanity.
In light of this, I suggest that the most important values one can teach young children are, one, a lifelong love of learning, and two, a loathing for any form of abuse of power.

A CHANCE ENCOUNTER WITH A STRANGER

Having read so far,
many readers will say: "All this is very well, but it has nothing
to do with me. I try my best to educate my kids and never have had
any serious problems with them. They love and help each other.
The children of other families? Well, that's somebody else's problem,
not mine."

These readers seem
to forget that THEIR children and THEIR families do not exist alone in
the world. Some day, necessarily as they grow and leave into adult
life, their children will have to come in contact with the outside world,
and will have to interact and coexist with the children of those OTHER
families. If those others suffer from serious mental problems because
of inadequate family rearing, the results of such contacts can easily be
tragic or fatal.

A recent example is
the case of Ennis Cosby, the son of the famous and wealthy comedian and
educator, Bill Cosby. Ennis was an almost perfect son, well-educated,
nice-mannered and considerate with others. He was about to successfully
finish his university studies, and he was the pride and joy of his parents
and all his family. But one night in a Los Angeles freeway, he had
to stop his car to change a flat tire, and there he had a chance encounter
with a stranger, Mikail Markhasev, and in that encounter he lost his life.
Why couldn't Markhasev stop his thrust to murder Ennis Cosby? We
shall probably never know. However, it is also probable that if Markhasev
had had an adequate upbringing and family life, he would have at least
had the bases to contain his murderous impulse.

So then, when we think
about to whom we owe our "brotherly love," we necessarily have to begin
with those with whom we share our mother, father, family, or upbringing.
However, both the Bible and science assure us that all human beings that
live upon this earth have descended from one and the same mother.
Then, if we really have an interest in the present and future well-being
of our "true" sons, daughters, brothers and sisters, this may be an appropriate
moment to begin to think again about what REALLY is important in this life, and on the wisdom and profound meaning of those
ancient questions from the Old and New Testaments:

- "Am I my brother's keeper?" ("Do we have an obligation to attend
to the well-being of our brothers and sisters?"), and,

- "Who is my neighbor?" ("Who are those to whom we have a moral
duty to consider as our brothers and sisters?").